On 3 August 2012 09:14, Gordon Joly wrote:
> Shame that this is not the whole truth and nothing but the truth/
> I wonder if his phone was hacked?
Glad you find it amusing Gordo. At some point you might want to recall
that I am a real person with a real personal life including my partner
of 22 ye
On 03/08/12 09:39, Fae wrote:
On 3 August 2012 09:14, Gordon Joly wrote:
Shame that this is not the whole truth and nothing but the truth/
I wonder if his phone was hacked?
Glad you find it amusing Gordo. At some point you might want to recall
that I am a real person with a real personal life
Hi folks,
In the rare few minutes that I'm borrowing a working laptop, I'd like to remind
you all of the Coventry meetup, which is being held in the Litten Tree in
Coventry city centre this coming Sunday (5 August) from 13:00 onwards.
Coventry is nice and easy to get to in the car or on public
I sent this around a while back.
The ORG would like our support.
Joscelyn Upendram is preparing a simple reponse on our behalf, if anyone
wants to offer her ideas contact her directly
Jon Davies.
>From ORG:
'Peter, is preparing a CDB briefing for companies and h
Sorry, have relatives visiting that day.
Doug
On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 1:35 PM, HJ Mitchell wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> In the rare few minutes that I'm borrowing a working laptop, I'd like to
> remind you all of the Coventry meetup, which is being held in the Litten
> Tree in Coventry city centre this
I would be strongly opposed to endorsing political lobbying groups on this
or any other issues. I would like Wikimedia UK to be an educational
organisation that remains fastidiously neutral on these conflicts and does
not take any political sides, whether it is the side of the Pirate Party
(feature
Im on family duties - I hope to come to the photo shoot
On 3 August 2012 13:35, HJ Mitchell wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> In the rare few minutes that I'm borrowing a working laptop, I'd like to
> remind you all of the Coventry meetup, which is being held in the Litten
> Tree in Coventry city centre t
I understand your fear of appearing political but it is not political to
respond to government consultations - that is a civic duty.
The Charity commission is very clear about this:
All charities are united by having a vision of a better society. They have
many different purposes, and are focused
On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 1:43 PM, Jon Davies wrote:
> I sent this around a while back.
> The ORG would like our support.
>
> Joscelyn Upendram is preparing a simple reponse on our behalf, if anyone
> wants to offer her ideas contact her directly
>
> Jon Davies.
>
>
>
On 3 August 2012 14:06, Tom Morris wrote:
>> http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/joint-select/draft-communications-bill/news/call-for-evidence/
> I did put together a list of Wikimedia-specific concerns with the
> draft bill a while back on the list.
> But everyone pooh-p
On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 2:02 PM, Jon Davies wrote:
> I understand your fear of appearing political but it is not political to
> respond to government consultations - that is a civic duty.
>
> The Charity commission is very clear about this:
>
> All charities are united by having a vision of a bette
On 3 August 2012 14:15, David Gerard wrote:
> On 3 August 2012 14:06, Tom Morris wrote:
>> Also, despite what Andreas says, it's not about partisanship, the bill
>> is drafted atrociously and extremely vaguely. Even if you agree with
>> what the government is trying to do, the bill is terribly w
So, the word 'we' is rather innocuously dangerous. :-) To clarify Jon's comment
that:
> In our case we felt that SOPA/PIPA was relevant and went as far as to black
> out the English Wikipedia for a day.
'We' the editing community (all >1000 that !voted online) felt SOPA/PIPA was
relevant, and
On 3 August 2012 14:02, Jon Davies wrote:
> So it is then up to a charity to decide 'what is relevant' In our case we
> felt that SOPA/PIPA was relevant and went as far as to black out the English
> Wikipedia for a day.
Your other - very valid - points notwithstanding, the charity didn't do that
You are so right Andy! Hush my mouth - I will go and hide under my WIkidesk!
On 3 August 2012 15:46, Andy Mabbett wrote:
> On 3 August 2012 14:02, Jon Davies wrote:
>
> > So it is then up to a charity to decide 'what is relevant' In our case we
> > felt that SOPA/PIPA was relevant and went as f
On 03/08/12 15:46, Michael Peel wrote:
'We' the editing community (all >1000 that !voted online) felt
SOPA/PIPA was relevant, and blacked out the site. 'We' the charity
communicated the decision and views of the community to the media.
It's very much this communication role that we the charit
On 3 Aug 2012, at 09:06, Gordon Joly wrote:
> On 03/08/12 15:46, Michael Peel wrote:
>>
>> 'We' the editing community (all >1000 that !voted online) felt SOPA/PIPA was
>> relevant, and blacked out the site. 'We' the charity communicated the
>> decision and views of the community to the media.
That's excellent - do you think we could use our own-branded derivative as
it's CC-BY-SA 3.0?
I've attached a tiny thumbnail of what it might look like.
--
Doug
On 3 August 2012 17:10, Michael Peel wrote:
>
> On 3 Aug 2012, at 09:06, Gordon Joly wrote:
>
> > On 03/08/12 15:46, Michael Peel wr
On 03/08/12 17:10, Michael Peel wrote:
On 3 Aug 2012, at 09:06, Gordon Joly wrote:
On 03/08/12 15:46, Michael Peel wrote:
'We' the editing community (all >1000 that !voted online) felt SOPA/PIPA was
relevant, and blacked out the site. 'We' the charity communicated the decision and
views of t
On 3 August 2012 19:38, Gordon Joly wrote:
> Just how do Wikimedia UK reach the public? They may be Radio 4 listeners,
> Scottish Herald readers, Morning Star readers, Sun readers, people who may
> only be looking at ITV News?
In the past 7 years of doing press I have *never* been able to get t
On 03/08/12 20:03, David Gerard wrote:
and as a group of charities supported by
public donation we owe it to the public to say who we are and what
we're about, nevertheless the whims of the press and of the news cycle
are not necessarily anything we should actually concern ourselves over
On 3 August 2012 19:17, rexx wrote:
>> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:WMNL_-_NRC_CHARITY_AWARD.jpg
> That's excellent - do you think we could use our own-branded derivative
Plus one to that. We'd need to use our own QR code ; and it would be
good to retain the hand-drawn font, and appe
On 3 August 2012 13:43, Jon Davies wrote:
> I sent this around a while back.
> The ORG would like our support.
>
> Joscelyn Upendram is preparing a simple reponse on our behalf, if anyone
> wants to offer her ideas contact her directly
>
> Jon Davies.
Its unreasonable to expect people to comment
23 matches
Mail list logo
